really bored of h**ster bashing

maybe i'm the only one, but i've really had it with bashing restaurants and their clientele for their age and the way they dress.

isn't this just flat out bigotry?

suppose i reviewed a restaurant or a taco stand or whatever, and said something like, "hey, great, authentic tacos, but the fanny packs and obesity of the people in line really ruined it for me. i hate going to restaurants filled with fat, polyester wearing people"?

wouldn't that just make me a jerk?

but, somehow, many chowposters find it o.k. to say how their dining experience was ruined by the h**ster crowd.

if a restaurant is filled with young people, dressed in the popular fashion of the day, does it really ruin your food? why are you focused on other people instead of your food and your dining companions?and how do you know someone is a "h**ster" just by the clothes they wear? stuff goes in and out of style. maybe they've been dressing that way for years.

perhaps it's just me, but i've grown tired of the judgement of people on their looks here on chowhound.

Yet it's worthy of you posting about it? Sounds like you're more than bored. Hipster style is so common I no longer notice it. Only place I see mention is in Yelp where people with too much time on their hands erronously think their rambling "reviews" are witty or creative. However can't say the H-words are singled out any more than the other favs: cougars, senior citizens and tourists.

to the best of my knowledge, no one has been denied the right to vote, to sit where they want on the bus, to live or work where they want, marry who they want, or to walk through the front door (as opposed to a back door labeled "hipsters only") because they were wearing an earring, a tattoo, and a vintage bowling shirt.

Judging others based upon existing prejudices is bigotry. As cresyd notes, the issue is bigotry, not systemic or institutional discrimination. The latter being a product of the widespread and entrenched acceptance of the former.

Therefore it's not bigotry -- and regardless of what Webster says about it (old white guy and all....) there isn't anyone on this board who truly believes that being made fun of because of what you're wearing (something YOU have chosen to purchase and wear) is anywhere in the same universe as being shunned from social and legal activities because of the color of your skin.

....learn to be happy with the choices you make about yourself and about your own life...other people's opinions about minor crap like clothes and what you do with your life are just that -- opinions. Life's too short to get fussed about haters hatin'.

Bigotry is nothing more than intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself. Not sure how much historical weight you need to see that judging people based on their clothing/facial hair/musical preferences qualifies.

I think that people are inflating the word bigtry/bigot (from Merrian-Webster: "(one) intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices") with discrimination. Discrimination is where we get to denying the vote and sitting on the back of the bus. Now bigotry contributed to invidiuals supporting discriminatory systems - but on its own, just means someone sticking with their prejudicial opinions. Be it about skin color or mustaches.

Not at all .Bigotry is to strong of a word .We all put on our own costumes just for that to be judged .We're all cool today come tomorrow ??? We'd all laugh at the photo of my uncle in his "Zoot Suit " but he was cool and hip back in his day key chain and all. No one escapes looking dopey to others, That's just the way it is .So enjoy

sunshine, i think my point is words like "bigotry" and "prejudice" are words with definitions, and was postulating that by their definitions, the behaviour cited applies.

it's important to realize bigotry is not a "contest." no one here, in my opinion, is equating bashing on chowhound with serious episodes from human history.simply, there are "levels" of bigotry, and i was wondering if this behaviour -- judging people on their appearance -- was low level bigotry.

obviously, you disagree, and that's o.k. i disagree my usage of the term demeans the seriousness and impact of said term.

I think the thing is that "hipster" is used a pegorative and derisive term that goes beyond "gee those bell bottoms look silly". Sometimes it's directed at young people. Sometimes it's directed at various regions (ie Brooklyn). But I think the major point is that the way that linus is complaining of its usage on CH.

The usage on CH that is being addressed is in regards to "this place is full of hipsters and thus ruined". Essentially the idea being that people of this ilk make being in an establishment unappealing. And for someone who feels like they're being spoken about, to say that such a sentence feels cruel is valid.

Now most of us individually choose to discriminate establishments because the clientele isn't our favorite. I am an American who lives in Israel, and I try to avoid establishments in Israel with a large number of Americans. But if I'm going to comment about a restaurant, instead of saying "this restaurant is full of Americans and thus ruined" - that's not only a nasty thing to write - but it doesn't explain the complaint. However, if I say "this restaurant is very popular with tourists who tend to come in large groups and are very loud making the atmosphere unappealing (to me)" - then I've explained my complaint and not been nasty to all Americans. Not to mention, resulting to a tactic of "rounding up" all sorts of people I dislike. Americans are hardly the only tourist group in Israel that contribute to a certain atmosphere in restaurants that I dislike. But it's an easy throw away.

If people want to defend this nastiness by saying that it's not bigotry just mean-spiritedness, so be it.